I think Zoltan was suggesting police protection when people aren’t allowed to have guns. I was suggesting that buying everyone a gun would be cheaper than buying them police protection. I would take it one step further and include children, ex-felons, mentally handicapped, physically handicapped, everyone in the category of people who should be provided with individual police protection if they aren’t allowed to have a gun.I think that everyone should buy his/her own gun.
Annie
I don’t think so…it (the Constitution) has been amended to allow regulations and restrictions on gun ownership.
Thank you,
Gary
As for the private security for foreign visitors and tourists…they would pay for that themselves. Our government only provides food, education, health care etc for ILLEGAL foreign visitors.Who is going to pay for this? Might be cheaper to supply everyone with a gun.
what if the foreign vistors bought their own firearms? I don’t suppose it would have protected the guy from Australia last year as he was blindsided, but I do believe that every law abiding person citizen or not should have the right to self protection.As for the private security for foreign visitors and tourists…they would pay for that themselves. Our government only provides food, education, health care etc for ILLEGAL foreign visitors.
As for those denied the right to keep and bear arms…their local government would be responsible for providing their personal security.
I really do agree that it would be more economical to provide every law abiding citizen a firearm for protection. The reduction of the costs of fighting violent crime would easily cover the firearms purchase.
Rather, the Supreme Court has ruled that the government can restrict gun ownership.I don’t think so…
Where can I read about this Gary?Rather, the Supreme Court has ruled that the government can restrict gun ownership.
I agree with you Annie.what if the foreign vistors bought their own firearms? I don’t suppose it would have protected the guy from Australia last year as he was blindsided, but I do believe that every law abiding person citizen or not should have the right to self protection.
Just my thoughts
Annie
I suppose that that does sound fair but I would not want to be the American standing over the dead body of a person who could have protected himself by arming himself but his country would not allow me to protect myself in his country and explain the way things work to his fatherless family. I think that I’d just avoid that country although I have never met an Australian that I didn’t like, I don’t think that a trip to their country will ever be on my things to do list.I agree with you Annie.
The point I am making is that maybe there should be reciprocal laws. In other words, only foreign visitors from countries that allow American visitors to carry our firearms should be allowed to carry in our country.
Sure - Goggle. The Supreme Court has always interpreted this as a state’s militia’s right, not an individual’s.Where can I read about this Gary?
Annie
Good Evening Annie: United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939).Where can I read about this Gary?
Annie
It’d be really interesting to know the NRA stance here and perhaps you could email your club and report back rather than wait for the next annual meeting.Excellent questions LongingSoul.
I don’t like to consider travelers and tourists as expendable…but they are involved in auto accidents, skiing accidents, hiking and climbing accidents etc…so I guess they ARE expendable when they VOLUNTARILY visit the U.S.A.
It is not that I don’t trust outsiders, nor am I presumptuous enough to interpret the laws of their nations, I would be the first to encourage outsiders to engage a private security service as a prerequisite to their obtaining a visa.
Your last question is real food for thought.
There are many law abiding U.S. citizens who are prevented from owning or carrying a firearm by draconian local ordinances. Washington D.C., Chicago and Detroit come to mind. Since these citizens are not afforded the same rights as other Americans, it should be the responsibility of the local, state or city to provide armed security protection 24/7.
I think this is a great idea. I will bring it up at the next NRA Annual Meeting.
Do people not qualify for human rights unless they are American?When your country becomes one of our states perhaps.
Considering that most massacres kill children and students it would certainly seem to be a priority that children and students are personally armed or provided with official protection in order that they are on a level playing field of civil safety. The Universal declaration of Human Rights says…I think Zoltan was suggesting police protection when people aren’t allowed to have guns. I was suggesting that buying everyone a gun would be cheaper than buying them police protection. I would take it one step further and include children, ex-felons, mentally handicapped, physically handicapped, everyone in the category of people who should be provided with individual police protection if they aren’t allowed to have a gun.
No but they are citizens of another country. And that country has it’s own government and laws. If they want to copy ours as a template, I’m sure we’d be good with that. In fact, I’m sure we’d prefer it. I think the Angloshpere is pretty similar, yet different. I think over there you all are guilty till proven innocent. No bill of rights, etc. I’ve never been, and would love to go sometime, and I’m sure it’s wonderful and the governmental changes would be relatively ‘below the radar’ compared to the cultural differences… and similarities… my heritage is Irish 50, Italian, 25, Scottish, French, Swedish, etc. 25… I really would love to visit more of the Anglosphere. My wife is German and Dutch.Do people not qualify for human rights unless they are American?
I would definitely visit America and through my own volition accept that even though I’m 5 times more likely to be murdered on it’s soil than at home, forgo carrying a weapon, …so that’s not the issue.No but they are citizens of another country. And that country has it’s own government and laws. If they want to copy ours as a template, I’m sure we’d be good with that. In fact, I’m sure we’d prefer it. I think the Angloshpere is pretty similar, yet different. I think over there you all are guilty till proven innocent. No bill of rights, etc. I’ve never been, and would love to go sometime, and I’m sure it’s wonderful and the governmental changes would be relatively ‘below the radar’ compared to the cultural differences… and similarities… my heritage is Irish 50, Italian, 25, Scottish, French, Swedish, etc. 25… I really would love to visit more of the Anglosphere. My wife is German and Dutch.
Anyway, that was my point, that we attempted (it was a very good attempt I believe) to incorporate the culmination of the Judeo-Christian values at the height of the age of reason into our Constitution. It was good timing. (Providential?) But it is still imperfect and corruptible, just like we all are.
To your specific question, the world is a dangerous place at different times. Allowing foreigners to bear arms might not be too wise in uncertain times. Plus if you are here of your own volition you come here knowingly waiving that “right”. If that right means that much to you, don’t come. Or become a citizen.
PS. I haven’t owned a gun since I was 24 years old… a long time ago… I think I need a few though…
That is “life liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. If adults who are in charge of those children were armed things might have gone better. I think about those poor sandy hook teachers who could only cover the children to attempt to save them and they died with the children. I think that I already proved that only some of our gun free areas are more dangerous. The crime rate in Brisbane is much higher than my town. I think that you should concentrate your time getting rid of crime there than here. Are you at all interested in stopping home invasion robberies and murder of young women in Brisbane’s parks instead of being obsessed with crime here?Considering that most massacres kill children and students it would certainly seem to be a priority that children and students are personally armed or provided with official protection in order that they are on a level playing field of civil safety. The Universal declaration of Human Rights says…
“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.” as number 3. In the US this means that the security of each person must be assured by the capacity for a deadly weapons response otherwise many would be disadvantaged.
You are a vicious and nasty person in my opinion. Don’t expect me to address you in future as I’m putting you on ‘ignore’.The crime rate in Brisbane is much higher than my town. I think that you should concentrate your time getting rid of crime there than here. Are you at all interested in stopping home invasion robberies and murder of young women in Brisbane’s parks instead of being obsessed with crime here?
The crime rate in Topeka, KS (an open carry state) is higher than San Francisco.That is “life liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. If adults who are in charge of those children were armed things might have gone better. I think about those poor sandy hook teachers who could only cover the children to attempt to save them and they died with the children. I think that I already proved that only some of our gun free areas are more dangerous. The crime rate in Brisbane is much higher than my town. I think that you should concentrate your time getting rid of crime there than here. Are you at all interested in stopping home invasion robberies and murder of young women in Brisbane’s parks instead of being obsessed with crime here?
These are the latest stats I could find they are for 2012The crime rate in Topeka, KS (an open carry state) is higher than San Francisco.
If you consider our “gun Laws” to be civil rights…then the national Rifle Association is the largest Civil Rights Organization in the world.I suggest that your gun laws are *civil *laws and pertain to civil rights that are American specific. They are not ‘inalieanable’ and not ‘divine’ and are subject to the needs of the common good of the country and by extension, the world.